Directions in Ancient Sport History

Journal of Sport History, Vol. 10, No. 1 (Spring, 1983)

Directions in Ancient Sport History

Don Kyle*

From the Minoan bull court to the Olympic stadium, from the Roman arenato the Byzantine hippodrome, the world of ancient sport has attracted in-creased attention and energetic scholarship in the last decade.1 The intensifi-cation of the study of ancient sport may be due to several factors: sport stud-ies, including the history of sport, has emerged as a field in its own right; andthe study of history has continued to broaden its interest into social and cul-tural areas such as sport and leisure.2 Furthermore, the inherent interest ofancient life and sport has grown as sport becomes more and more prominentin modern life. The following critical essay offers recommendations, cautionsand impressions; although aspiring to make some academic contribution, myintention is to make the area more accessible to the non-specialist and moreinviting to the student of sport history in general.

Indicative of recent interest and scholarship is the increase in professionalactivity in the area of ancient sport of late. Traditionally, Europe has ledNorth America in the field, but North America (especially scholars in Califor-nia and New England) is improving rapidly. Sessions on ancient sport, forexample, have been held in meetings of the North American Society for SportHistory and the Canadian Symposia on the History of Sport and Physical Edu-cation. Increased scholarly acceptance seems to be indicated by the fact thatthe 1979 meeting of the American Philological Association included a sessionon ancient sport, and at the last APA meeting (December, 1982) Hugh M. Leeorganized an informal seminar on the study of Greek and Roman athletics.

A great many articles and books have been published on ancient sport re-cently, some more enthusiastic than erudite; but the quality and number ofsuch publications overall have risen. Articles on ancient sport have appearedfrequently in the Journal of Sport History and the Canadian Journal of His-tory of Sport as well as continuing to appear regularly in Greece and Rome.3

* Mr. Kyle is an Assistant Professor in the Department of History at the University of Saskatchewan,Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada.

1. ‘Sport’ is a non-ancient and vague term at best. ‘Athletics’ usually suggests serious competition, train-ing, prizes and the goal of victory. ‘Physical education’ implies instruction and exercise with goals of healthand the general development of the body. ‘Recreation’ or ‘leisure’ applies to non-work, relaxation and rejuve-nation with pleasure or fun as the goal. ÿSport is used as a general rubric for all these areas as well as hunting,dance and even board games. Herein ‘sport’ generally will refer to public, physical activities, especially thosewith competitive elements, pursued for victory, pleasure or the demonstration of excellence. Abbreviationsused will be obvious or will follow L’année philologique.

2. Donald Chu, Dimensions of Sport Studies (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1982), p. 67.3. The JSH and CJHS have done much to promote the study of sport history in North America Unfortu-

nately, often the articles in these journals use ancient sources uncritically or at second hand. CJHS includesbrief general introductions to various ancient sites or authors; and JSH, while tending to be much stronger on

7


Also, more articles have been appearing in such venerable journals as theJournal of Hellenic Studies and the American Journal of Archaeology. In fact.articles of relevance to ancient sport turn up in widely dispersed periodicals,from Scientific American to Byzantinische Zeirschrift. Many important articlesare found in the Kölner Beitrage zur Sportwissenschaft (1972- ) producedby the research centre at the Institut für Sportgeschichte der Deutschen Sport-hochschule. Certainly, for ancient and sport history overall, the introductionof Stadion in 1975 created a major international forum.4 Ancient sport hasbeen the topic of many new books and parts of broader histories of sport,5 andAres Publishers of Chicago has been busily reprinting works in its ‘Library ofAncient Athletics’ in response to growing demands from both scholars andstudents.6

If the spread of courses on ancient sport in universities throughout NorthAmerica is any indication, the study of ancient sport is ‘coming of age.’ Suchcourses foster further sport studies and help convince modern students that theancient world is neither ‘dead’ nor irrelevant. Anyone interested in working inalmost any area of ancient sport should begin with Ingomar Weiler’s DerSport bei den Völkern der alten Welt (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buch-gesellschaft, 1981), which surveys sources and issues and gives excellent bib-liographical directions. Soon work in the area will be greatly aided by a Bibli-ography on Greek and Roman Athletics, under preparation by T.F. Scanlon,which will include a comprehensive bibliography with an introductory com-mentary.7 One can also benefit from the recent Sport and Recreation Indexand from the normal reference works and bibliographical aids for ancientstudies. L’année philologique still lists sport under “Navigation, Chasse,Sports and Jeux divers,” but it has included Stadion since 1978. Furthermore,recent volumes of Der Kleine Pauly have included useful reference articles onancient sport.8

modern than on ancient topics, provides useful reviews and journal surveys. Citius Altius Fortius, a Spanishjournal, has been active but is unfamiliar to me.

4. In the announcement of Stadion 1 (1975) the editors explain that “Stadion has been given an emphati-cally interdisciplinary character so that the history of sport will be freed from its isolation in both its methodol-ogy and its scholarly organization.” The aims of Stadion include making various kinds of historical and philo-logical research available to sport historians and attracting social historians and historians of culture into sportstudies.

5. For example: H. Uberhorst, ed., Geschichte der Leibesübungen, 2 vols. (Berlin: Bartels and Wernitz,1972, 1978); R. Renson et al., eds., The History, the Evolution and Diffusion of Sports and Games in DifferentCultures, Proceedings of the Fourth International HISPA Seminar, (Brussels Bestuur voor de LichamelijkeOpvoeding, 1976); Earl F. Zeigler, ed., A History of Sport and Physical Education to 1900 (Champaign:Stipes, 1973).

6. In his Preface to the reprint edition of E.N. Gardiner, Athletics of the Ancient World (Chicago: Ares,1979), S. G. Miller calls this ”. . . the most useful text on the subject for the serious student and the Englishspeaking layman alike.” (p.vi). As Miller suggests, a new edition and nor just a reprint of Gardiner’s work of1930 is needed; but until it appears AAW remains essential.

7. This article is indebted for many of its virtues, but none of its faults, to the superior scholarship ofWeiler and Scanlon. I would like to thank Professor Scanlon for allowing me to see a draft of his work: hisbibliography will replace the less comprehensive work by E. Maroti, Bibliographie zum antiken Sport undAgonistik, Acta Antiqua et Archaeologica 22, Szeged, 1980. I would also like to thank Professors Waldo E.Sweet and Michael Poliakoff for their helpful comments

8. For example, see articles by O.W. Reinmuth in KP 4 (1972); “Nemea,” 47; “Pankration,” 460; “Pen-tathlon,” 618; “Ringkampf,” 1436-37; “Pygme” 1246-48.

8

Ancient Sport History

Since sport was so great a part of the Greek and Roman civilizations funda-mental to western civilization, a proper understanding of the history of sportmust ‘start at the beginning.’ Ancient sport has its attractions, such as the‘original’ Olympics, but also its difficulties, notably the nature of ancient evi-dence. Also, in looking back it is essential to try to see sport ‘as it was,’ ratherthan seeking from it myths and heroes for modern times. The evidence mustbe allowed to ‘speak for itself,’ and anachronistic terms, categories and fearsare not to be imposed. As H.W. Pleket has charged, the history of sport hassuffered from an excess of antiquarianism and from a classicist bias, includingan aversion to professionalism and a tendency to see ‘rise and fall’ patterns.9

In 1972 the conventional picture or ‘schema’ of ancient sport, derivingfrom the late nineteenth century and apparent in works by E.N. Gardiner, J.Jüthner and others, was still quite authoritative.10 It held that ancient sportrose to a brief golden age in early Greece only to endure a long, regrettabledecline through the rest of ancient times. Seen as an heroic phenomenon withboth glory and a tragic flaw, Greek sport was produced by unique historicalcircumstances including the famous Greek agonistic spirit. Supposedly deriv-ing from spontaneous, aristocratic Homeric games, sport reached its height inthe organized, amateur Panhellenic Games of the sixth century. Soon, how-ever, sport fell victim to its own popularity and entered a process of deteriora-tion. Rewards, training, and specialization led to professionalism and ruinedsport through the fifth century until fourth-century sport was mere spectacle.Seen through a romantic haze, this rise and fall of Greek sport, corrupted bymoney, was not without modern parallels. Obviously, this ‘schema’ owesmuch to Coubertin and modern Olympism—the ideal of amateur, humanistic,apolitical international sport. 11

According to the conventional interpretation, the Hellenistic era was an ageof ‘decline’ from the start and so deserved less attention. Sources did in-crease, and Greeks and gymnasia spread out, but the sporting ideal was lost:and soon Rome cast a shadow on the world of ancient sport. The ancient Ro-mans-so impressive in non-sporting areas—only hastened the decline oftrue, Greek sport because the Roman mind could not appreciate it. Romantastes called for more violent and spectacular ‘games.’ Although there wereexceptional Romans, patronage, and minor revivals in Greek sport, the powerand character of Rome could not be altered. The rise of Christianity com-mendably undermined the Roman spectacles, but unfortunately the churchsaw Greek sport as a pagan practice. Thus the Olympic Games ceased and,except for the factionalism and chariot races of Byzantium, the history of an-cient sport ended. This schema of ancient sport has not fared well under scru-tiny in 1972-1982.

9. H. W. Pleket, “Games, Prizes, Athletes and Ideology. Some Aspects of the History of Sport in theGreco-Roman World,” Stadion 1 (1975), pp. 51-53.

10. On the development of the study of ancient sport, see Weiler, Sport, pp. 1-13; Pleket, “Games,” pp.49-89; or S.G. Miller’ s Preface to Gardiner, AAW, pp v-xii.

11. On the aristocratic and ritualistic aspects of Olympism, see John J. MacAloon, This Great Symbol:Pierre de Coubertin and the Origins of the Modern Olympic Games (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1981).

9


Recent scholarship has quickly come a long way, advancing through thediscovery and publication of new sources and through the reevaluation of the-ories and bodies of evidence. The study of ancient sport is no longer to beseen as an antiquarian or isolated pursuit. Ancient sport history is a dynamicstudy—a changing study of change (but also of continuity). With its variedsources and significant issues, ancient sport demands an interdisciplinary ap-proach. Sport history has been heavily influenced by the methods and con-cerns of the social sciences; scholars are now more interested in broad issues,like popular conduct and opinions, rather than simply what athletes did. Mostrecent studies have a more objective approach free of classicist or other biasesthat tend to see Greece as an ideal and Rome as a warning. Overall, the trendis revisionist and demythologizing, and the future looks promising.

The last decade saw the passing of H.A. Harris, the scholar who made sucha sincere and significant contribution to the study of ancient sport. His articlesare important for their treatment of specific problems and pieces of evidence,and his major works, though influenced by the schema and rather traditionalviews, have stimulated many with their enthusiasm. 12 Harris’ Sport in Greeceand Rome (London: Thames and Hudson, 1972), a work with the intendedaudience and useful but abbreviated notes of the Aspects of Greek and RomanLife series, remains one of the most popular general works. In Part One Harrisdiscusses Greek athletics, largely summarizing and updating his early GreekAthletes and Athletics, and editing himself concerning the pentathlon, discusand starting gates. His brief introduction to the Roman world will be dis-cussed below. Throughout the survey in Part One the schema is overly evidentin Harris’ athletic idealism and his references to the modern era.13 Despite thequality and energy of his investigations, his traditional interpretation was be-coming anachronistic even as he wrote. More refreshing is Harris’ Part Twowhere he presents an intriguing discussion of ball games, swimming, weight-liftin g and other “Fringe Activities.” The emphasis of this section is ques-tionable in such a supposedly general work, but the collection of materialsdoes show how much (ball games) or how little (swimming) evidence existsfor different activities. Part Three on chariot racing is the most valuable of theparts for its treatment of Greek equestrian events, the Greek hippodrome, andthe Roman and Byzantine circus. Although the title is too broad and impliesthat one volume could cover the topic, SGR will continue to be a widely-usedintroduction to ancient sport, showing students a range of topics, evidenceand problems. 14

Burckhardt’s long-popular idea that the Greeks had a special agonisticspirit, and accordingly that only they could have raised sport to the level of the

12. Harris wrote many articles in the 1960’s and 1970’s, often for G&R, including “The Method of Decid-ing Victory in the Pentathlon,” G&R 19 (1972), pp. 60-64. For a full bibliography, see his Greek Athletics andthe Jews, eds. I.M. Barton and A.J. Brothers, (Cardiff: University of Wales, 1976), pp. 7-9.

13. Harris particularly objected to the rise of professionalism: “When money comes in at the door, sportflies out the window, and the Greek athletic scene thereafter exhibits the same abuses that are becoming onlytoo familiar to us our big business world of so-called ‘sport’.” (p. 40).

14. The appendix, “Athletes and their Dreams”, on the Onirocriticon of Artemidorus, shows Harris in hiselement revealing unfamiliar items as sources for technical information about sport.

10


Periodos or circuit of crown games, has come under attack. I. Weiler’s exten-sive analysis of the agon motif in Greek myth and legend, Der Agon imMythos (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1974), notes ver-sions of the motif and contends that, while the Greeks certainly were competi-tive, they were not unique in this respect.15 Weiler sees competitiveness astypical of early societies in general. If not in some particularly ‘Greek’ cir-cumstances, where then was the origin of sport? More and more studies areadmitting that in this area as well the Greek mainland probably owed much toCrete and the East. 16 How and when formative influences produced sport orathletics in Greece remains uncertain, and the answer varies to some extentwith interpretations of the source and significance of sport in Homer. Chrono-logical exactitude about the emergence of Greek sport is unlikely, but the rela-tionship of sport to funeral games and hero-cults-attested in epic and art-isnow well recognized. 17

Following German trends to comparative and world histories of sport.Weiler’s Der Sport bei den Völkern der alten Welt (including “Sport bei denNaturvölkern” by Christoph Ulf, pp. 14-52) places Greek sport in a broadcontext. Weiler provides a concise but thorough introduction to sport in theprehistoric, emerging, Greek, and Roman cultures. He surveys the rise andoperation of sport in various places, pointing out influences and variations,and again challenging the special agonistic spirit of the Greeks. After a dis-cussion of scholarship and Ulf’s survey of sport in primitive cultures, Weilergives chapters on the Near East, Greece and Rome before closing with a valu-able chapter on sources. The section on Greek sport (pp. 74-214) reflects tra-ditional areas of scholarship: a brief historical summary precedes longer sec-tions on events and the Games; gymnastic events and Olympia get far moreattention than equestrian events, fringe activities or the other Games of the

15. For a discussion of Weller’s views, see J. Ebert, “Zu mythischen Agonen und zurn Problem des ago-nalen Wesens der Griechen,” Stadion 2 (1976), pp. 307-314. Weiler discusses scholarly interpretations ofagonism in Homer in “AEIN ARISTEUEIN. Ideologiekritissche Bemerkungen zu einem vielzitierten Hom-erwort.” Stadion I (1975), pp 199-228.

16. The Greeks themselves saw the athletic tradition as an importation from Crete, and more and morescholars are open to not only the Minoan-Mycenean background to Greek sport but even roots deeper into theNear East. W. Decker, “Zum Ursprung des Diskuswerfens,” Stadion 2 (1976), pp. 196-212, argues that theGreek discus goes back through the Homeric solos to lumps of smelted copper that were used as trade items bythe Phoenicians and probably originated in Cyprus. Research on Minoan sport involves such quandaries as thesignificance of bull-leaping; on the techniques used, see John G. Younger, ÿBronze Age Representations ofAegean Bull-Leaping,” AJA 80 (1976), pp. 125-137.

L. Boutros, Phoenician Sport. Its Influence on the Origin of the Olympic Games (Amsterdam: J.C Gieben,1981), discusses excavations at Amrit and Tyre in making an unconvincing argument that the tradition of orga-nizing sports events linked with religious rites was established in Phoenicia and introduced by Phoenicians intoGreece around 1500 B. C. Boutros forces too much from indefinite evidence in his attempt to credit Lebanesesport history with a prestigious beginning.

17. M.W. Willcock, “The Funeral Games of Patroclus,”BICS 20 (1973), pp 1-11, demonstratesHomer’s use of sporting activities and contexts to portray character. He discusses Homer’s method through astudy of the development of Antilochus as a substitute for Patroclus. Noting that funeral games predominate toHomer, and that comparative studies of funeral games in other cultures show that single combat is a commonfeature. Willcock makes a stimulating suggestion:

So the very incident in the Iliadic games which seems most suspicious, and indeed is most unsuited tothe tone of the epic and our concern for the well-being of the characters—the fight in armour betweenDiomedes and Ajax—is, from the antiquarian point of view, the most authentic of all events, (p. 3).

On recurring representations of the funeral games of Patroclus and Pelias, see Lynn E. Roller, “Funeral Gamesin Greek Art,” AJA 85 (1981), pp. 107-119.

11


Periodos, Some may question Weiler’s comparative approach but the work isvery useful, and Weiler deserves praise for urging us not to treat Greek sportin isolation.

B. Bilinski’s research on the nature and development of sport in relation-ship to Greek society and culture essentially presents the schema but from aclass-conscious perspective. The 133 pages of his Agoni ginnici. Componentiartistiche ed intellettualli nell'antica agonistica greca (Rome: AccademiaPollaca, fasicle 75, 1979) contain many ideas already familiar from hisL’agonistica sportiva nella Greci antica, a literary and social study of thethemes of praise and criticism of sport, and of the antagonism between thephysical and intellectual realms. In Agoni ginnici Part One, “Dalle originimicenee alla polis,” briefly covers the origin and rise of Greek sport. PartsTwo, “L’arte e l’intelletto nei giochi panellenici,” and Three, “Il fisico el’intelletto: equilibrio o supremazia nell’epoca ellenistica e greco-romana,”include ideas on professionalism in sport and the victory of the intellectualover the physical realm. Bilinski feels that early Greek athletes were nobles,who harmonized the physical and intellectual aspects of life, before a socialrevolution took place in sport through intellectual criticism and socio-eco-nomic change as Greece passed from a primitive to a plutocratic stage. Thephilosophical opposition of mind and body was related to the emergence ofdivisions of class and labour, the development of democracy, and the rise oflower-class professionalism in sport. According to Bilinski, by the fourth-century age of spectator sport the socially dominant classes had shifted to anintellectual viewpoint; their preference is shown in the increase of intellectualand cultural activities associated with later agonistic festivals, and in the func-tions of the gymnasia and ephebeia in Greece. Bilinski tends to place his ath-letes in society, and to listen to ancient critics of sport, according to his ownversion of the schema. His works have not met with much support, and hismajor opponent in the areas of the sociology and ideology of sport promises tobe H.W. Pleket.

A leading demythologizer of Greek sport whose works combine detailedresearch and common sense, Pleket asserts that our concepts of amateur andprofessional and our attitudes about prizes are often anachronistic for Greeksport, and that their terms and categories (prize and crown games, panhellenicand local games) were often ambiguous. Challenging the schema, he arguesthat from Pindar’s until Roman Imperial times members of the upper classwere not absent from sport (neither from the running events nor the body con-tact sports) and that the prevailing ideology of Greek sport was a product ofthat same class. 18 He discusses examples of upper class athletes who contin-ued to compete successfully in many contests, and therefore must have beenas specialized or professional as other competitors; and he points out that nosocial stigma was attached to accepting rewards for athletic success. He con-tends that even in the post-classical era athletes retained the early aristocratic

18. Most relevant here are Pleket’s “Games, Prizes, Athletes and Ideology,” and his “Zur Soziologie desantiken Sports,” Mededelingen Nederlands Historisch Institut te Rome 36 (1976), pp. 57-87.

12


ethos of sport, stressing glory, courage, toil and endurance, and that this ideo-logical continuity was partly due to the continued involvement of the upperclasses, with the gymnasia and ephebeia retaining significant physical aspectsand acting as a bridge to the world of the Games. Where Bilinski tends toperiodize and juxtapose, Pleket tends to see continuity and slow change.While Bilinksi is heavily influenced by literary and philosophical sources,Pleket uses specific studies and often non-literary sources.

Along with new interpretations, the reexamination of our evidence and thediscovery of new, mainly archaeological, sources have advanced the study ofGreek sport. For a good introduction to the sources, see Weiler, Sport, pp.277-88; the following simply notes some items of recent or continuing inter-est. Among literary sources Pindar, like Homer, remains a fertile subject ofscholarship for many fields including sport. William H. Race, “The End ofOlympia 2; Pindar and the Vulgus,” CSCA 12 (1979), pp. 251-67, exploresthe nature of Pindar’s audience; and Leonard Woodbury’s “The Victor’s Vir-tues: Pindar, Isth. 1. 32ff.,” TAPA 111 (1981), pp. 237-56, is a valuableanalysis of the concepts of ponos and noos and of the importance of publicjudgments in Pindaric society. Plato has been of interest as a source for physi-cal education,19 but Daniel A. Dombrowski, “Plato and Athletics.” Journalof the Philosophy of Sport 6 (Fall 1979), pp. 29-38, points out that Plato alsopaid considerable attention to sport and athletics.20 Discussing dramaticsources, D.F. Sutton, “Athletics in the Greek Satyr Play,” RSC 23 (1975),pp. 203-209, uses several examples to show that athletic contests, especiallyboxing and jumping, were common in satyr plays. Sutton reaches to includequasi-athletic situations and possibly satyric plays, but the study shows thatathletic motifs were influential in yet another area of Greek literature.21

Sourcebooks on Greek sport have had their limitations as teaching aids, butS.G. Miller has helped the situation with his Arete (Chicago: Ares, 1979).This supplements rather than replaces R.S. Robinson’s Sources for the His-tory of Greek Athletics (reprinted, Chicago: Ares, 1979), still the standardbook of readings for introductory courses. Miller provides his own moderntranslations of some 85 texts organized thematically by traditional topics(events, nos. 5-24) and areas of recent interest (women, nos. 35-39, mislistedin the Contents; heroes, nos. 40-54; ball play, nos. 55-57). He also includestranslations of important inscriptions (IG II 2 2311) and papyri (P Oxy. II 222).Passages are introduced briefly and there is an index and glossary but no notesor bibliography. Miller makes specific improvements upon Robinson andavoids her value judgments, but the organization of both authors’ works

19. For example, Eckhard Meinherg, “Gymnastische Erziehung in der platonischen Paideia. Versucheiner zeitgemässen Betrachtung,” Stadion 1 (1975), pp. 228-266, with a good bibliography, pp. 265-266.

20. Earl R. Anderson, “Plato’s Laser Hippias: A Neglected Document in Sport History, “JSH 8 Nr. 1(1981), pp. 102-110, tries to present this Socratic dialogue (set at Olympia and including sport metaphors) as a“fundamental text in the history of such metaphors” (p. 109). The more impressive response by Richard M.Fox, “Plato’s Use of Sport Analogies in the Lesser Hippias,” JSH 9 Nr. 1 (1982), pp. 100-106, explains thatPlato simply uses, and sees as valid, analogies from sport as from geometry or medicine.

21. It is notable, and a credit to his scholarship, that J. Juthner’s commentary, Philostratos, Uber Gymnas-tik, of 1909 has yet to be replaced.

13


makes finding individual items or supplementary information unnecessarilydifficult.22

The study of agonistic inscriptions with their wealth of specific and officialinformation has been at the forefront of ongoing research in Greek sport.23

Following upon the accomplishments of L. Moretti and L. Robert, J. Eberthas published a volume of numerous victor epigrams with texts and discus-sions.24 E.J. Morrissey has examined the elements and structure of inscrip-tions listing agonistic festivals.25 Numerous articles in Zeitschrift für Papyro-logie und Epigraphie, especially those by R. Merkelbach, testify to thecontinuing contribution from epigraphical and papyrological studies.26 Num-ismatics, as well, can be quite informative.27

The prominence of sport in various types of Greek art has long been recog-nized; and recent studies have tended to concentrate on specific themes,genres or works. For example, S. Woodward, “Ajax and Achilles Playing aGame on an Olpe in Oxford,” JHS 102 (l982), pp. l73-195, discusses vari-ous depictions in vase paintings of the scene of a board game (of uncertainnature) made famous by the work of Exekias.28 M.A. Tiberius, “Panathe-naika,” AD 29 (1974), pp. 142-151, offers yet another explanation of‘pseudo-Panathenaic’ vases.29 Art history is a challenging field, and it is to behoped that new general or introductory works on sport in Greek art will soonappear.

New sources and studies have aided the continuing discussions on the ori-gin, technique, and regulations of various events and activities in Greeksport.30 Many views but little consensus exists about questions concerning thepentathlon: the nature of the jump, the method of the discus throw, and themeans of determining a victor.31 As well as stadia and races, the actual nature

22. Apparently Waldo E. Sweet will be publishing a collection of his own translations including a greateruse of Latin sources. A well-organized volume suitable for a course on both Greek and Roman sport is needed,and such a volume from such a scholar would be welcome indeed.

23. Weiler, Sport, pp. 281-283, supplements the introduction to epigraphical sources by M. Lämmer, DieBedeutung epigraphischer Zeugnisse für die Geschichte der griechischen Gymnastik und Agonistik (Köln: His-torisches Seminar der Deutschen Sporthochschule, 1968).

24. J. Ebert, Griechische Epigramme auf Sieger an gymnischen und hippischen Agonen (Berlin: AkademieVerlag, 1972). Numerous discussions of agonistic items appear in L. Robert, Opera minora selecta, vols. I-IV(Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1969-1974).

25. E.J. Morrissey, “Studies in Inscriptions Listing the Agonistic Festivals,” (Diss. Harvard, 1974): alsosee his “Victors in the Prytaneion Decree (IG I2 77),” GRBS 19 (1978), pp. 121-125.

26. For example: R. Merkelbach, “Uber ein ephesisches Dekret für einen Athleten aus Aphrodisias undüber den Athletentitel paradoxos,” ZPE 14 (1974), pp. 91-96; G. Daux, “Décret d’Ephèse pour un vanqueraux Isthme et Néméa,” ZPE 28 (1978), pp. 41-47.

27. For an introduction and a discussion of events, prizes and coin legends, see H. Karl, “Antique GreekCoins as a Source for the Historian,” CJHS 10 Nr. 2 (1979), pp. 76-90.

28. Cf. D.L. Thompson, “Exekias and the Brettspieler,” Arch Class 27 (1976), pp. 30-39.29. For a discussion of a statue of an athlete, see A.F. Stewart, “Lysippan Studies 3. Not by Daidalos?”

AJA 82 (1978), pp. 473-482.30. Sound treatments and bibliographical aids for various events can be found in Weiler, Sport; Harris,

SGR; or R. Patrucco, Lo sport nella Grecia antica (Florence, Olschki, 1972). Patrucco’s work is illustrated andvery well documented from ancient evidence. However, he adds little to earlier works except for a much betterthan usual treatment of equestrian events.

31. H.A. Harris, “The Method of Deciding Victory in the Pentathlon,” G&R 19 (1972), pp. 60-64; R.Merkelbach, “Der Sieg im Pentathlon, ZPE 11 (1973), pp. 261-269; J. Ebert, “Noch einmal zum, Sieg imPentathlon,” ZPE 13 (1974), pp. 257-262; F. Brein, “Die Wertung im Pentathlon,” Forschung und Funde.Festschrift B. Neutsch (Innsbruck: lnstitut für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Innsbruck, 1980), pp. 89-93.

14


and types of Greek running have been of interest of late.32 The ‘heavy’events—wrestling, boxing, and pankration—continue to attract attention, asdoes the issue of weightlifting.33 Nudity in gymnastic events—its origin andexplanation—remains a topic of discussion. J.C. Mann, “Gymnazo in Thu-cydides I.6. 5-6,” CR 24 (1974), pp. 177-178, feels that, after an early age ofwearing loincloths for exercising, athletes returned to nude competition at theend of the fifth century.34 Finally, one can note that the operation of Greekequestrian events generally has received less attention,35 and that more workshould be forthcoming on swimming and boating.

Olympia and the Olympic Games, the showplace if perhaps not the birth-place of ancient sport, have been the subject of many publications, often withconsiderable redundancy. As the queen of agonistic sites, Olympia was thefirst complex of Greek sports facilities to be thoroughly excavated. The pastand continuing contributions of the German Archaeological Institute deservepraise, and Olympia remains the starting place and basis for comparison formost investigations of the sites, facilities and festivals of Greek sport.36

Among recent surveys of the Olympic Games two works stand out—one asthe best introduction to the Olympic experience and one as the best illustratedwork on Olympia.

Reflecting the scholarly and stylistic virtues of its authors, The OlympicGames: the First Thousand Years (London: Chatto and Windus, 1976) byM.I. Finley and H.W. Pleket remains unsurpassed as a concise examinationof Olympia and the Games. The work seeks and largely achieves a compro-mise between a broad interest level and the advances of recent demythologiz-ing scholarship. The authors are not unenthusiastic about the modern Olympicideal but they draw clear lines between the ancient and modern Olympics.37

On the discus, see H.A. Harris, “A Fragment from the Larisioi of Sophocles.” CR 24 (1974), pp. 4-5; and onvarious questions about the Javelin throw, see Hugh M. Lee, “The Terma and the Javelin in Pindar, Nemean vii70-3, and Greek Athletics,” JHS (1976), pp. 70-79.

32. See especially, M. Poliakoff, Studies in the Terminology of the Greek Combat Sports, Beitrage zurKlassischen Philologie 146 (Meisenheim, 1982). Victor J. Matthews, “The Hemerodromoi,” CW 68 (1974),pp. 161-67, discusses the credibility of ancient feats of running. On running in Homer: Victor J. Matthews,“Swift-Footed Achilles,” EMC 19 (1975), pp. 37-43; Adolf Köhnken, “Der Endspurt des Odysseus Wett-kampfstellung bei Homer und Vergil,” Hermes 109 (1981), pp. 129-148.

33. W. Rudolph, a leading expert on heavy events, offers “Sportverletzungen und Sportshaden in herAntike,” Alretum 22 (1976), pp. 21-26. N.B. Crowther, “Weightlifting in Antiquity Achievement and Training,” G&R 24 (1977), pp. 111-120, discusses passages and techniques to suggest that feats of ancient weight-lifters were not impossible.

34. A. J. Arieti, “Nudity in Greek Athletics,” CW 68 (1975), pp. 431-436, after a good collection oftestimonia, makes the ingenious suggestion that public nudity allowed the athlete—despite the sexuality in thecontests—to show his self-control over his body.

35. For good introductions, see Harris, SGR, pp. 151-172 and Patrucco, Sport, pp. 373-402. Dorothy KentHill , “Chariots of Early Greece,” Hesperia 43 (1974), pp. 441-446, uses archaeological evidence to discussharnessing.

36. Some of the better works on Olympia include: H.-V. Hermann, Olympia: Heiligtum und Wett-kampfstätte (Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 1972); A. Mallwitz, Olympia und seine Bauten (Munich: Prestel Verlag,1972), W. Rudolph, Olympische Spiele in der Antike (Leipzig: Urania Verlag, 1975); and the series of Olym-pische Forschungen of the German Archaeological lnstitut. Recent finds include a vaulted gate of the thirdcentury A.D. possibly associated with the hippodrome, and some stone starting blocks from the archiac sta-dium. On the time of year of the games, see S.G. Miller, “The Date of the Olympic Festivals,” MDAI(A) 90(1975), pp. 215-231. On the debate over the origins of the games, see Ch. Ulf and I. Weiler, “Der Ursprungder antiken Olympischen Spiele in der Forschung,” Stadion 6 (1981) in press.

37. Finley and Pleket are well aware of the influence of Coubertin’s ‘Olympism’: “It was the Olympic

15


After a brief, up-to-date coverage of the site, events and administration, thework makes a real contribution with its discussions of the athletes, spectators,and intellectual and political aspects of Greek sport. Finley and Pleket invitetheir readers to overcome the difficulties moderns have with the very Greekideas that participation was not an end in itself, that victory always was thegoal, and that victory could lead to other rewards or be used for ulterior mo-tives.38 From its earliest days Greek sport was tough and bloody;39 it involvedthe serious pursuit of victory by men who did not worry about modern con-cerns like amateurism. Sport was not suddenly debased socially or morally bythe existence of valuable prizes.40 Finley and Pleket also show that Olympicsport was a major spectator phenomenon, an important political forum, and arecipient of patronage even under the Romans. The authors very sensibly notethat the ancient critical tradition had little effect and must be used cautiouslyas evidence.41 The illustrations and plans in the work are carefully selectedand well presented; the major irritation is the complete lack of footnotes.Readers would benefit greatly from access to the research and sources behindthis popular but impressive work.

Versions of a valuable but perplexing work under the general editorship ofN. Yalouris appeared from 1976 to 1979 under various broad titles but withonly minor alterations and no re-editing.42 The most appropriate title is that of1977, Athletics in Ancient Greece, since the work goes beyond Olympia totreat non-Olympic events, athletics in poetry, art and education, and sport in

‘spirit’, the Olympic ideology, as he conceived it, that was to serve his purposes, not the ancient Olympicreality,” (p. 4). They explain in their Preface (p. 5) that, “Although we have abstained from drawing manycomparisons, and certainly from pointing to ‘lessons’, the interests of the modern reader and the experience ofthe modern Olympics have always been in view.” More subjective news on the proper nature of sport arerelegated to the Epilogue, pp. 128-132.

38. This work has obviously benefited from Pleket's specific studies such as “Some Aspects of the Historyof the Athletic Guilds,” ZPE 10 (1973), pp. 197-227, and “Olympic Benefactors,” ZPE 20 (1976), pp. 1-18.Useful also is A. Hönle’s short but sound work, Olympia in der Politik der griechischen Staatenwelt (Beben-hausen: Rotch, 1972). Discussing the political overtones of Greek sport and the influence of Olympia in thepolitical history of Greece and Magna Graecia to roughly 400 B.C., she argues that the Games and victory atOlympia formed a significant, though not major, factor in the internal and interstate politics of the Archaic Age(but less so thereafter).

39. R. H. Brophy, “Deaths in the Panhellenic Games, Arrichion and Creugas.” AJP 99 (1978), pp. 363-390, discusses Pausanias’ accounts of the posthumous victories of the early heavy athletes. Arrichion (564B. C.) and Creugas (480 B.C.).

40. The careers and rewards of athletes form an area of valuable study H. Buhman, Der Sieg in Olympiaund in den anderen panhrllenischen Spielen (Munich: UNI-Druck, 1972) provides a summary of the pro-cedures, tangible and intangible rewards, and implications of victory. Also see J. Ebert, “Olympia-OlympischeSpiele, zu einigen Aspekten des Sports und des Athletenbildes der Antike,” Altertum 22 (1976), pp. 5-20.

David C. Young suggests that professional and non-noble athletes were not new phenomena in classicalGreek sport; his views on professionalism will appear in his forthcoming book, The Myth of Greek AmateurAthletics. It is now well recognized that ‘expansion clubs’ like Croton in Magna Graecia lead the mainland inareas like training and prizes.

41. Finley and Pleket (p. 116) point out that, “Monotony sets in quickly... A feeling of unreality alsobegins to creep in quickly. Neither the practice of the athletes themselves nor the popularity of the Gamesshows any signs of being affected, let alone harmed, by the critics.” Also see R. Muth, “Olympia: Fazinationund Kritik,” Wort im Gebirge 15 (1976), pp. 7-39.

42. N. Yalouris, ed., History of the Olympic Games (Athens: Ekdotike Athenon, 1976), in Greek; but cf.Athletics in Ancient Greece, Ancient Olympia and the Olympic Games (1976); The Olympic Games Through theAges (1977); and The Eternal Olympics. The Art and History of Sport (New Rochelle: Caratzas, 1979). Also anillustrated work with an unspecific title, J. Swaddling’s The Ancient Olympic Games (London: British Museum,(1980) uses a clear but unexceptional overview to connect black and white illustrations of Olympia, a new modelof the site, and holdings of the British Museum relevant to ancient sport.

16


Crete, Mycenae and Early Greece. No notes are provided but an Olympicvictor list is appended and information is given about the excellent color illus-trations and drawings. Surpassing in quality the text and their own captions,the illustrations make this the best work of its type.43 Major Greek scholarswere involved and integrated archaeological and artistic evidence, but thelargest share of the writing (128 of 303 pages) fell to K. Palaeologos, Alter-nate Rector of the International Olympic Academy. The discussions are gen-erally sound, but deferential and not free of errors. The explanation of theephedros (pp. 122-123) makes little sense; there is no extensive discussion ofthe literary sources; and many items of information seem to have been in-cluded more through interest than reliability. The whole chapter on “FamousAthletes in Ancient Greece” (pp. 264-75) simply tells stories. A serious newedition of the text is in order, but the illustrations should continue to make thisbook highly desirable.

While Olympia still reigns, recent years have seen very productive (espe-cially archaeological) activity concerning the other three sites of the Periodos.Delphi, with its festival and facilities, is being studied as an agonistic as wellas an oracular center.44 Delphi offers the earliest extensive remains of a Greekgymnasium and the elaborate, later stadium embellished by Herodes At-ticus.45 This stadium’s long-awaited, comprehensive publication has comeforth from P. Aupert, Fouilles de Delphes. II. Le Stade (Paris: de Boccard,1979). With abundant illustrations and plans, and a list of testimonia, Au-pert’s work sees four stages in the development of the Delphic stadium fromthe third century B.C. to the second century A.D.46 At Isthmia, excavationshave discovered the remarkable triangular pavement with its starting line, andO. Broneer has explained its operation and discussed the proper terminologyfor starting lines.47 The history of athletics at Isthmia offers valuable compar-ative material and raises important questions about the shifting relationshipbetween Greek stadia and temple precincts.48

Nemea, the least prestigious member of the Periodos in antiquity, is nowthe most exciting source of new information on the history and sites of Pan-

43. For example, the caption to the excellent illustration (ill. 105) might point out that the javelin on horse-back was not an Olympic event.

44. S.G Miller, “The Date of the First Pythiad,” CSCA II (1978), pp. 127-158, would replace the tradi-tional date of 586/5 with 582/1; but Alden A. Mosshammer, ÿThe Date of the First Pythiad-Again,ÿ GRBS 23(1982), pp. 15-30, disagreees.

45. J. Pouilloux, “Travaux à Delphes a l’occasion des Pythia,” BCH Suppl. IV. Études Delphiques(1977), pp. 103-123, has published the third-century inscription recording preparations in the gymnasium andstadium. G. Roux, “A propos des gymnases de Delphes et de Délos. Le site du Damatrion de Delphes et lesens du mot sphairisterion,” BCH 104 (1989), pp. 127-149, discusses ball games and the Delphic gymnasium.

46. Also by Aupert, see “Athletica, I: Epigraphie archaique et morphologie des stades anciens.” BCH 104(1980), pp. 309-315, on the theatron area in the stadium.

47. O. Broneer, Isthmia II. Topography and Architecture (Princeton: American School of Classical Studiesat Athens, 1973) with Appendix II, “Balbis, Husplex, Kampter,” pp. 137-142; cf. his “Starting Devices inGreek Stadia, AJA 76 (1972), pp. 205-206.

48. On the cult of Palaimon and its possible connection to a classical monument, see David W. Rupp,“The Lost Classical Palaimon Found?” Hesperia 48 (1979), pp. 64-72. D.R. Jordan and A.J.S. Spawforth,“A New Document from the Isthmian Games,” Hesperia 51 (1982), pp. 65-68 publish a late tablet, probably) aJudge’s ballot. For a general introduction, see M. Walton, “The Isthmian Games,” CJHS 13 Nr. 1 (1982), pp.74-82.

17

Journal of Sport History, Vol. 10, No.1 (Spring, 1983)

hellenic athletics. Ongoing excavations have unearthed a fourth-century stadium, built at a considerable distance from the sanctuary and t~mple of Zeus,with seating arrangements for some 40,000 people. This stadium is fascinating with its vaulted entrance tunnel (complete with inscriptions), its startingline, and its hydraulic system. 49 Nemea seems to confirm suspicions that thesecond half of the fourth century was a crucial time in the development ofGreek stadia: at various Greek sites stadia for some reason then became morearchitecturally elaborate or they shifted position relative to their sanctuaries. 50

With Isthmia, Nemea has kept active the debate over Greek starting lines. Didthe races start from one or both ends of the stadium; did competitors run inlanes, and did they tum around individual posts or a single turning post; whatwas the popular terminology and how did starting devices operate? RecentlyS.G. Miller published the discovery of a single, isolated block with a socketfor a turning post at the south end of the stadium at Nemea. In "Lanes andTurns in the Ancient Stadium," AlA 84 (1980), pp. 159-166, he suggests thati~dividual posts were used for certain races like the diaulos but that there wasa common post for other races like the dolichos, and that, when appropriate,lanes could be marked out in chalk. This explanation suits Nemea but it willnot be the last word in the debate.

Indicative of the excitement generated by Nemea is the following announcement:

On the eastern side of the Sanctuary of Zeus a votive pit of considerableinterest was discovered containing quantities of pottery dating to the third quarter of the 6th century B.C. and metal objects of a specifically athletic character.Most interesting of these finds were an iron discus of extraordinary weight (almost 19 pounds), a lead jumping weight, two iron javelin points, and a fragmentary bronze strigil. I\tlany of the vessels were discovered upside down, perhaps having been deliberately smashed during a celebration of some sort. Thenature of the athletic gear points toward a pentathlete as the celebrant. 51

The complete and final publication of Nemea will be of tremendous value,and it is fortunate that this responsibility lies with the talented S.G. Miller.

Beyond the Periodos, recent archaeological activity at other Greek sites hasshown how profitable the study of 'local' games can be. At Athens a fifthcentury starting line has been found on the Panathenaic Way, raising questions about the history of sport at Athens and the topographical relationship ofsports facilities to other elements of a polis. 52 Also concerning Athens, S.c.

49. See S.G. Miller, "Excavations at Nemea, 1981," Hesperia 51 (1982), pp. 19-40 and other reports inHesperia since 1975. Also see F.D. Harvey, "A Nemean Metagraffito," AlA 86 (1982), p. 586, concerning akalos inscription from the tunnel. For general introductions, see S.G. Miller, "Tunnel Vision," Archaeology33 Nr. 5 (1980), pp. 54-56; or D.P. Hart, "The Ancient Nemean Festival," ClHS 8 Nr. 2 (1977), pp. 24-34.

50. D.G. Romano, "An Early Stadium at Nemea, " Hesperia 47 (1978), pp. 27-31, suggested that an earlystadium existed near the sancutary. S.G. Miller, "Excavations at Nemea, 1982," Newsletter of the AmericanSchool ofClassical Studies at Athens (Fall, 1982), p. 11, feels that a location for such an archaic stadium justeast of the Temple of Zeus may be indicated by a highly distinctive clay layer dating to the second half of thesixth century. As yet, no gymnasium, palaestra or hippodrome has been identified; the building southwest ofthe Temple of Zeus is no longer seen as a palaestra.

51. Miller, Ibid., p. 11. From Miller also comes an argument against a boy's pentathlon at Nemea: "ThePentathlon for Boys at Nemea," CSCA 8 (1976), pp. 199-201.

52. T. Leslie Shear, "The Panathenaic Way," Hesperia 45 (1975), pp. 362-365. James G. Thompson,

18


Humphreys, “The Nothoi of Kynosorges,” JHS 94 (1974), pp. 88-95, in dis-cussing the question of nothoi and social exclusiveness in Greek gymnasia,has challenged Delorme’s theory of the military origin of the Greek gym-nasium and reminded us that we know really very little about gymnasia beforethe fourth century.53 Excavations in the forum (agora?) of Corinth have un-covered a Hellenistic and two classical racecourses.54 Curved, with paintedletters marking seventeen positions, and with an unusually wide gap betweenthe grooves, the fifth-century line perhaps accommodated only certain typesof races for which an usual starting stance was used. At Corinth runners ap-parently turned a single post at either end and did not run in parallel lanes. Ona terrace to the south of the racecourse Corinth also has a ring, apparently forheavy events. Such sites of ‘local’ or ‘prize’ games allow us to investigateGreek sport in civic contexts and to relate it to internal civic politics and thedevelopment of urbanization.55 Like demythologizing studies, informationabout local games should encourage us to acknowledge local variations in thegames and facilities of Greek sport, and even variations in the significance ofthat sport for various areas and groups.

The Hellenistic age, covered to some degree above, deserves comment.Like local sites and festivals, the Hellenistic age is a promising field because itsaw the increase of documentation and the spread of sporting Greeks throughan expanded oikumene. Mainland Greece was less powerful but sporting tra-ditions remained strong, and the contact of Hellenistic Greeks with other peo-ples raises questions of cultural interaction. Traditionally seen as an age ofdecline, the Hellenistic age is now better seen as an age of transition betweenGreek and Roman sport and an area of mutual influence-more of a two waystreet than a dead end in the history of sport.

The significance of Alexander the Great in sport history is discussed byT.S. Brown, a noted scholar of ancient historiography, who demonstrates athorough command of the sources from coins to the ‘Alexander Romance.’56

Given the nature of the sources, Alexander’s true abilities or his feelings

“Solon on Athletics,” JSH 5 Nr. 1 (1978), pp. 23-28, argues that Solon’s rewards made athletics more demo-cratic and diverted attention from socio-economic problems, but his case rests on some rather uncritical use ofthe sources. On a curious Athenian event, see E. Kadletz, “The Race and Procession of the Athenian Oscopharoi,” GRBS 21 (1980), pp. 363-371.

53. For a concise treatment of Athenian gymnasia, see R. E. Wycherley, The Stones of Athens (PrincetonPrinceton University, 1978), pp. 219-235. On the operation and elements of gymnasia, see Diskin Clay. “AGymnasium Inventory from the Athenian Agora,” Hesperia 46 (1977), pp. 259-267.

54. C.K. Williams II and Pamela Russell, “Corinth Excavations of 1980, the Sports Complex.” Hesperia50 (1981), pp. 1-19.

55. Local festivals are generally better known from epigraphical and archaeological than from literarysources. Irene C. Ringwood, “Festivals of Ephesus,” AJA 76 (1972), pp. 17-22, has produced another in herseries of publications on local festivals. On excavations at Argos, including the discovery of staring line blocksin the agora, see the annual reports of the French School in BCH: on the name of the festival, see P. AngeliBernardini, “Hekatombeia o Heraia di Argos,” Stadion 2 (1976), pp. 213-217. Also notable is the discovery ofa stadium at Haleis: M. H. Jameson, “The Excavation of a Drowned Greek Temple,” Scientific American(October 1974), pp. 111-119.

56. T.S. Brown, “Alexander and Greek Athletics, in Fact and Fiction,” in K.H. Kinzl, ed., Greece andthe Eastern Mediterranean in Ancient History and Prehistory, Studies Presented to Fritz Schachermeyr (Berlin:de Gruyter, 1977), pp. 76-88. John Mouratidis, “Alexander the Great and the Promotion of Greek Games inthe East,” CJHS 13 Nr. 1 (1982), pp. 61-73, is a less satisfactory treatment of the issues and sources, influ-enced by either idealistic or patriotic views.

19


about sport, and his motives in establishing games in the east, must remainuncertain; Brown simply suggests that much of the sporting material (as inPlutarch) is a product of the later biographical tradition. Brown’s obvious butwell-substantiated conclusion is that the Macedonians significantly appreci-ated the political value of Olympic wins (Philip) and of Olympia as a forum(Alexander): “The historical Alexander the Great did not compete at Olym-pia, but he never lost sight of the importance of that festival in influencingGreek opinion.” (p. 80).

Judaea in the Hellenistic and early Roman era made no great contribution tothe development of ancient sport, but the experience of the ancient Jews pro-vides interesting reactions to sport as an element of Hellenization or Ro-manization. H.A. Harris’ slim, posthumous volume. Greek Athletics and theJews, has his characteristic enthusiasm but is a work of disappointing scholar-ship.57 Harris contends that the Jews in Judaea and the Diaspora accepted agreater degree of Hellenization than has generally been recognized. Harrisargues from archaeological (sports facilities at Caesarea, Tiberias, Tarichaeaand elsewhere) and literary evidence (Macabees, Josephus, Philo and Paul)that the Jews were not exclusive but rather were familiar with and even en-joyed Greek sport. Harris at best tempers rather than refutes other viewpoints.The works of M. Lämmer on sports in Judaea show a far greater familiaritywith detailed evidence and a better appreciation of the political realities in-volved.58 Judaea existed under Greek or Roman powers which had to be ac-commodated to some degree. Sport metaphors, without proving intimateknowledge or enthusiasm, were plentiful in literature and suitable for gentileaudiences; sports facilities in provincial areas do not prove native involve-ment. Finally, Herod the Great was significant as a builder of sport com-plexes, a patron of Olympia, and an introducer of Greek and Roman festi-vals—and perhaps he was, as Harris says (p. 35), “a fine physicalspecimen”— but he was a ruler and not a normal Jew.

Although traditionally receiving less attention and approbation than itsGreek counterpart, Roman sport has attracted increasingly scholarship since1972. Earlier, those who did look at the sport history of Rome were generallycontent to rely on works such as Friedländer’s massive, detailed, and stillinvaluable study of Roman life and manners, or the briefer surveys by Carco-pino or Balsdon. Such influential works tend to treat Roman sport as negativeoverall—a defect in a society that otherwise achieved so much in engineer-ing, law and other areas.59 Here again renewed study and the demythologizing

57. H. A. Harris, Greek Athletics and the Jews, eds, I.M. Barton and A. J. Brothers, (Cardiff: University ofWales, 1976). The editors were well intentioned producing this work in tribute to Harris, but the work haslittle more substance than a lengthy article.

58. Various articles by Lämmer have appeared in KBSW; 1(1972), pp. 160-173; 2 (1973), pp. 182-227; 3(1974), pp. 95-164; 5 (1976), pp. 37-67. Also see his “Greek Contests in Galilee during the Reign of HerodAntipas,” in U. Simri, ed., Physical Education and Sport in Jewish History and Culture (Netanya: WingateInstitute, 1977), pp. 41-53.

59. J. Carcopino, Daily Life in Ancient Rome (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1941) makes a characteristiccomment (p. 267):

Despite all the extenuations we may urge, the Roman people remain guilty of deriving a public joy fromtheir capital executions by turning the Colosseum into a torture-chamber and a human slaughter-house.

20


trend have had a therapeutic effect, and scholars are realizing that Rome hasmuch to offer to the sport historian by virtue of the wealth of its sources andthe complex nature of its sport.

The supposedly 'special' case of Roman sport has suffered by comparisonwith the 'special' case of Greek sport: Greek sport elevated and Roman sportdebased humanity. Following the theme that Rome 'copied' Greece, there hasbeen interest in Rome's resistance to (and partial adoption of the most vulgaraspects of) Greek sport (Greek sport at Rome). The impression left from concentration on Roman critics of Greek sport, seen as a majority, was that Romans were unwilling or unable to appreciate purely Greek sport. There hasalso been interest in Rome's influence on Greek sport (Greek sport underRome). Greek sport was well into decline by the time of the Roman conquestand Rome's baser inclinations-despite exceptions like Hadrian-hastenedthe fall of Greek sport. The major focus of Roman sport was the truly Romantype of diversion found in the circus and arena, a legacy from the Etruscanswith their preoccupation with death. The spectacles were understandably condemned by Christians and by noble or enlightened Romans, seen as a minority, but to little effect. Symbolized by the Colosseum, the fame and scale ofthe Roman games have left a deep, unfavourable impression.

The challenge of understanding Roman sport is typified by the fact that thesame author, Juvenal, penned both panem et circenses and mens sana in corpore sano. Roman sport was multi-dimensional; it is hard to get at the generalized or common Roman attitudes to athletics, physical education, andspectator sport. The nature of our sources, often critical or satirical, must constantly be considered. Furthermore, it may be impossible to separate Romanfrom Etruscan or Greek elements . Part of the achievement of recent work hasbeen the demonstration that there was great variety in Roman sport: participatory as well as spectator, female as well as· male, amateur and voluntary aswell as professional and enforced, and playful and private as well as politicaland,Pvblic sport. The best ~tudies no longer see Roman sport as an isolatedphenomenon but relate it to cross-cultural influences and human nature. Newworks study Roman sport as 'sport,' as an element of Roman life, and not as ablemish on the grandeur of Rome. Finally, Roman sources are being approached with as much critical awareness and objectivity as possible, withunderstanding and not judgment as the goal.

Again, Harris' SGR illustrates the 'state of the art' on Roman sport in 1972.In his Chapter Two, "Greek Athletics in the Roman World,' Harris discussesGreek athletics in and under Rome: Roman critics, Greek professionals, andthe unsuccessful introduction of Greek-style games. Harris agrees with traditional notions that the Romans resisted Greek sport and never came to appreciate it fully. Real Roman inclinations, inherent but directed for politicalends, were toward cruel, spectator events, which were found in Greek sport

I.P.V.D. Balsdon, Life and Leisure in Ancient Rome (London: Bodley Head, 1969) makes a similar comment(p. 308) on the practice of throwing humans to animals: "No one can fail to be repelled by this aspect ofcallous, deep seated sadism which pervaded Romans of all classes."

21


only in decline. Furthermore, any Roman interest in physical education waslimited and militarily or practically oriented. Such views have provoked aconsiderable response, and Harris thus indirectly advanced the study of Ro-man sport.60 Harris’ problem with Roman sport is one of definition: for him‘sport’ was Hellenic and thus limited to whatever elements of Greek sportsurvived into, or were adopted by, the Roman world. The Roman spectacles(except for perhaps the circus) were not sport and therefore are mentionedonly pejoratively. Also, Harris does not treat field sports (hunting and fish-ing), which the Romans appreciated and shared with the Greeks. On the posi-tive side, much Roman material is found in Harris’ treatment of ball gamesand fringe activities, including a discussion of the boat race in Aeneid V (pp.128-132). Moreover, Harris has done us a great service in his discussion(Chapters 7 to 15) of the Greek antecedants, the facilities, procedures andorganization of chariot racing in Roman and Byzantine times. Harris tends tosee more differences than similarities in the three eras, and his interpretationof factions (p. 243) must now be dropped. However, as in his treatment ofGreek sport, Harris has made a provocative and valuable, if rather conserva-tive and selective, contribution to the study of Roman sport.

Also appearing in 1972, R. Auguet’s Cruelty and Civilization: The RomanGames (London: George Allen and Unwin) shows the state of the study ofvarious Roman spectacles to that time. Auguet also is selective, claiming thathis will not be an exhaustive study of the immense topic. However, his pur-pose is broad: to understand the Roman mind and the sociology of Romethrough a study of its public games (Preface, p. 7). Auguet feels that the issueof cruelty is central to such an understanding: were the Romans a special peo-ple with some inherent tendency to cruelty? Auguet’s thesis (p. 15) is that nolink necessarily existed between the Roman mind and the cruelty of variouspopular public games. In fact, there was to a degree a certain contradictionbetween the Roman mind and cruelty. The cruelty so characteristic of Romewas not innate but was the product of historical circumstances. The Romanmind was utilitarian and practical; it was averse to destroying potentially valu-able items. While the Roman mind was against sadism, or pointless, unpro-ductive cruelty, it was in favor of useful, calculated cruelty, that is crueltyagainst irreconcilable foes, for political ends, or to demonstrate power as asymbol of empire.61 In effect, Auguet would remove the stereotype of theparticularly cruel Roman by reinforcing the stereotype of the pragmatic Ro-man.62 Perhaps cruelty should not surprise us in an imperial power with a long

60. Harris’ views are capsulized on p. 73:In the Roman world, Greek athletics had no tradition of centuries and no belief in a Golden Age to lend aromantic glow. Athletics meetings were introduced by ambitious politicians as an amusement to gratifythe people....Athletics meetings may have provided a change from other attractions, but there is noevidence that they ever seriously competed with them in popular esteem. Such appeal as they had waschiefly to the leisured and literate classes; this explains the number of allusions to athletics in Latinliterature.

61. The Romans supposedly regarded the procurement and killing of a lion in the arena as a “symbol oftheir complete power over the universe” (p. 113).

62. Thus Auguet suggests that the realism of the mythological dramas in the arena (p. 101) was not due just

22


history of foreign and domestic wars. Auguet demonstrates but might morefully explain that any initially productive impetus became excessive by thetime of the early Empire. Also, Auguet might point out that the taste forspectacles, in part an element of Romanization, spread extensively to peopleslacking the same historical background. The banality of cruelty and the allureof violence are human and not just Roman.

Auguet’s widely-read introduction to the Roman spectacles has an interest-ing thesis; but there is little in its contents that is new, and it does little toadvance sport history. The two chapters on gladiators discuss the develop-ment of munera from rite to spectacle but make no improvement on M.Grant’s brief, popular work on gladiators. Auguet’s two chapters on the hunts(venationes), outlining the various events and the procurement of the animals,are heavily indebted to Friedländer. The two chapters on the circus are per-haps the best parts of the book but remain inferior to treatments by Harris andAlan Cameron.63

Auguet’s claim that the work has “no pretensions to erudition” (p. 7) is aweak excuse for not giving adequate notes. He mentions ancient and modernauthors in the text but gives no specific references. There is a certain irony inAuguet’s style: he claims he will undermine the traditional notion of Romansadism but he seems to delight in graphic descriptions of gore and deca-dence.64 Moreover, he often uses ancient sources uncritically for sensational-ism. His use of Juvenal’s Satire VI to talk of the attraction of women to gladi-ators leads to inane comments and shows little appreciation of the intent orgenre of the source.65 Really understanding the Roman sporting mind in-volves going deeper into—and beyond—famous passages from Cicero, Juve-nal and Ovid.

Again showing how far scholarship has come in a decade, Weiler’s Sportprovides direction to important sources and studies on Roman sport. He sur-veys (pp. 215-276) the rise, development, and basic character of Romansport, Etruscan influences, Roman attitudes to Greek sport, spectacles, baths,and ball games. Perhaps Weiler’s greatest contribution is that he encouragesus not to see Roman sport as a special case or an aberration unrelated to earliersport or human nature.66 He looks at Roman sport as part of Roman civiliza-tion and also as part of the broader history of ancient sport. For example,

to “executions painstakingly romanticized to avoid monotony”; instead it can be explained by a theory of“cruelty for aesthetic ends” (p. 104).

63. Chapter 8 on “The Ruins of the Circuses and Amphitheatres” should be placed earlier or be an appen-dix. In Auguet’s favour, the book has twenty-four well chosen illustrations of a variety of locations, events andartifacts.

64. Auguet claims a higher purpose but he reads much like Daniel P. Mannix, Those About to Die (NewYork: Ballantime, 1958).

65. In “The Story of Eppia” (pp. 166-130), Auguet comments:The passion for gladiators... was the concomitant of excesses of a more animal sensuality, unlessindeed one would prefer to call it the height of refinement. For those who gave way to it were not modestyoung girls naively moved by the prestige of a helmet, but mature and wealthy matrons whose perver-sions were aroused by the sight of scars.

66. In a similar vein, M. Gwyn Morgan, “Three Non-Roman Blood Sports” CQ 25 (1975), pp. 117-122,has argued that some supposedly Roman blood sports involving birds were actually more popular with Greeksthan Romans.

23


Weiler feels that Roman sport was influenced by a mixture of Etruscan, Greekand Italian influences.67 Major characteristics, such as the central importanceof the munus and the prominence of spectator sports, go back to the earlyroots of Roman sport; but later Roman attitudes to Greek-style sport becamemore positive, especially in the areas of leisure and physical education.Weiler is able to see that Greek and Roman sport had major differences butalso similarities and cultural ties. Greece and Rome shared a passionate enthu-siasm for sport as a major element of their civilizations.

Eberhard Mähl, Gymnastik und Athletik im Denken der Römer, Heuremata2, (Amsterdam: Grüner, 1974), questions the traditional view of Rome’s reac-tion to Greek sport. His short but important study shows that famous negativeremarks about Greek sport can be seen as part of a Roman critical, conserva-tive tradition. We must appreciate the influence of literary traditions and thengo beyond them to investigate popular attitudes. Furthermore, the evidence ofart and archaeology has much to offer to a fuller understanding of Romanattitudes and practices.

Certainly the early Romans did not enthusiastically embrace the most fa-mous aspects of Greek athletik—the formal athletic competitions and thehighly trained athletes. The Romans and Greeks did enjoy various activities,such as hunting and swimming, in common, but the Romans balked at theexcessive training and overdevelopment of Greek athletes. Greek athleticismseemed to lack military value and the Romans had strong reservations aboutthe Greek tradition of athletic nudity.68 Thus the early Romans much pre-ferred their own customs of informal exercise and spectator sports. However,Roman reservations about Greek athletik did not mean that the Romans paidno attention to physical health. In fact, Mähl shows that the Romans advo-cated proper care of the body and that they were concerned about exercise,diet and massage. Although their approach was moderate and practical, theRomans increasingly came to appreciate and to adopt Greek gymnastic prac-tices (gymnastik).

Significant changes took place in the late Republic and early Empire. Em-perors played a major role in changing popular attitudes to Greek athletik andgymnastik: they fostered games with Greek events and they established publicfacilities, especially the imperial thermae, which made Greek-style exercisemore appealing and convenient for Romans. Nudity ceased to be a problemand the popularity of gymnastik grew, especially with the Roman youth. Artand archaeology show that the popularity continued and even spread to Ro-

67. On Etruscan sport, see V. Schmidtchen and M. Howell, “Leibesübungen bei den Etruskern. Ein prob-lemonentierter Uberblick,” in Uberhorst, Geschichte, vol. 2, pp. 168-199: and A. Hus, “Les jeux publics etfunéraires en Étrurie,” CEA 6 (1977), pp. 59-71. On the equestrian interests of the Etruscans and Greeks, seeM.C. Root, “An Etruscan Horse Race from Poggio Civitate,” AJA 77 (1973), pp. 121-137.

68. Nigel B. Crowther, “Nudity and Morality: Athletics in Italy,”CJ 76 (1980-1981), pp. 119-123, arguesthat the Roman prejudice against nudity contributed largely to the prejudice against Greek athletics: “However,when nudity became more acceptable to the Romans, at least to the average citizen if not to the intellectual,then also Greek athletics became a more acceptable and attractive part of Greek life.” (p. 119). Crowtherwould date the introduction and acceptance of nudity to the early Principate.

24


man women.69 Furthermore, the success of Greek games, like the CapitolineGames of Domitian, was due to a growing popular audience—it was not justa matter of imperial eccentricities. The evidence of inscriptions and archaeol-ogy shows that Romans fostered and patronized Greek festivals, gymnasiaand physical education throughout the empire. Greek sporting life fared quitewell under the Roman empire, in part because of changing popular attitudes ofthe Romans.70

Mähl explains that we have failed to appreciate developments in Romanpopular attitudes and practices because of overconcentration on certainsources. Major Roman authors like Seneca, often in philosophical or rhetori-cal works, have left famous criticisms of Greek sport as offensive and un-practical, especially from a military point of view. Careful study by Mählshows that these were part of a critical literary tradition. Critics lamented thepassage of the good old days of inherent manliness and Varronian simplicity;Greek sport and contemporary Roman practices were attacked under the slo-gan of mos maiorum.71 Such criticisms often had political overtones; and thecritical authors, in using references to sport to suit various lines of argument,were not always consistent in their attitudes. Moreover, history and archaeol-ogy show that the Roman critics of Greek sport were neither very representa-tive nor influential.

Such research suggests that earlier interpretations are in need of revision.The Romans were a practical people but not so narrowly so that they rejectedthe value of exercise and health. They were quite open to gymnastik and in-creasingly open to watching, if perhaps not participating, in athletik. In a de-lightful study, Jutta Väterlein, Roma Ludens. Kinder und Erwchsene beimSpiel im antike Rome, Heuremata 5, (Amsterdam, Grüner, 1976), also showsthat the Romans could be playful. Väterlein’s collection of literary and ar-chaeological evidence discusses games and toys of numerous kinds to showthat the Romans appreciated the value of fun and play, not just for childrenbut for various age levels and for adults (male and female).72 Much of hermaterial might not qualify as sport, and she does feel that the Romans are stillto be seen as a practical people; but her study shows that in their private hoursand diversions—when their public duties were through—the Romans couldbe quite fun-loving and ‘human.’ Neither Väterlein nor Mähl, however,

69. Mähl, pp. 54-56, discusses critical comments on female athletes; also cf. Hans Langenfeld,“Griechische Athletinnen in der romischen Kaiserzeit,” in Renson et al., The History, the Evolution and Diffu-sion of sports, pp. 116-125.

70. Cf. H.W Pleket, “Sport und Leibesubungen in der griechischen Welt des hellenistisch-romischenZeitallers,” in Uberhorst, Geschichte, vol. 2. pp. 280-311; Sterling Dow, “Athletic Agones in Roman AthensHonoring Tykhe Poleos,” AJP 100 (1979), pp. 31-44.

71. A.D Booth, “Roman Attitudes to Physical Education,” EMC 19 (1975), pp 27-34, argues that theRoman educational system had little regard for physical education, especially in the Later Empire. Booth sug-gests that the praise of Roman physical hardiness of the good old days by litterati and panegyricist was aliterary convention, that these authors praised what themselves shunned. Booth's literary study is stimulat-ing, but his own example of the actions of Cato in physically educating his son does not well suit his argument.

72. Väterlein copiouly documents evidence for the instruments and activities of Roman play and leisure—everything from dolls, tops and rattles to dice and board games and of course, numemous ball games. Väterleindiscusses not only children and average Romans hut also major literary and political figures.

25


would deny that the most distinctive and popular aspects of Roman sport werethe spectacles of the circus and arena.

An excellent introduction to the public sports of the Romans is provided byR. Isidori Frasca in Ludi nell’antica Roma (Bologna: Patron Editore, 1980).Using a well-documented, up-to-date collection of ancient literary and archae-ological sources, Frasca surveys Roman games and physical education fromthe early Republic to the Late Empire. Much of the material is familiar fromHarris, Friedländer and elsewhere, and other works are better on particulartopics (see Cameron on factions below), but Frasca provides a good generaltreatment showing that sports and spectacles were major and related elementsof Roman life. As well as looking at the various events from Greek games tovenationes and naumachiae, the work looks at the organizers, participants andspectators of the games. Also, Frasca provides a good introduction to thesports facilities of the Romans from the amphitheatres to the great bath com-plexes.

Always a popular topic in ‘Roman Civilization’ but traditionally just notedin sports studies in negative comparisons to Greek athletics, the gladiatorialcontests of ancient Rome are distasteful to modern sensibilities but their sig-nificance in Roman sport history must not be overlooked. Recently W. Weis-mann has studied the history and organization of the gladiatorial combats andthe Christian reaction to them.73 R.I. Curtis offers an entertaining reinterpre-tation of the epigraphical evidence for one gladiator.74 Following on the workof L. Robert, P. Sabbatini Tumolesi discusses various, usually epigraphical,documents and shows how widespread gladiatorial games became throughoutthe empire.75 Arguably more popular and spectacular than the gladiatorialcombats, the chariot races of the Roman circus offered action, danger andsocial interaction. Chariot races were held more often than munera and theCircus Maximus could house four or five times as many spectators as the Co-losseum. The circus in general has now been well covered by Harris and Cam-eron, but more specific studies of individual charioteers or even horses con-tinue to appear.76

Sport was a factor in the urban development of Rome and an element in theRomanization of the empire from El Jem to Colchester, so the topic of the art,

73. W. Weismann, “Gladiator,” RLAC 11 (1979) Lief 81, pp. 23-45.74. R.I. Curtis, “A Slur on Lucius Asicius, the Pompeian Gladiator,” TAPA 110 (1980), pp. 51-61, gives

a good example of the value of looking again at long-known documents, here a graffito from Pompeii (CIL IV4287). Through a philological discussion of the words and form of the inscription, and by explaining the suita-bility of the slur for Pompeian readers, Curtis argues that a certain Jesus, perhaps an embittered fan, deliber-ately and carefully insulted Asicius. He associated the murmillo with a cheap fish sauce and implied that he wasunmanly. Moreover, by parodying the words and form of an aedilician edict, Jesus suggested to readers aformal declaration of the worthlessness of the gladiator.

75. P. Sabbatini Tumolesi, “Documenti gladiatori dell’Occidente romano, I: lscrizioni dell’eta reppubli-cana,” RAL 29 (1974), pp. 283-292; “Gladiatoria, IV,” RAL 27 (1972), pp. 485-495: cf. L. Robert. Lesgladiateurs dans l’Orient grec (Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1971).

76. R. Syme, “Scorpus the Charioteer,” AJAH 2 (1977), pp. 86-94, gives a thorough discussion of thecareer of Flavius Scorpus, a charioteer who died in the late first century A. D. G. Bianco, “Un antico cavalla dirazza nella storia della gare circensi,” RIL 111 (1977), pp. 313-333, uses a study of the horse Hirpinus to showthe popularity and expense of the Roman circus. Also see M. Sqarciapino Floriani, “Circhie spettacoli circensinelle province romane d’Africa,” RAL 34 (1979), pp. 275-290.

26


architecture and archaeology of Roman sport is broad indeed. Roman sportsfacilities are discussed in standard works on Roman architecture but a fewother items can be noted. John Pearson’s Arena: The Story of the Colossem(New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973) focuses on the Colosseum as the most fa-mous monument of the Roman spectacles, but it also treats the wider aspectsof the games.77 By a non-classicist and meant for a general audience, Arenabelabours the violence of the Colosseum but it provides a lively introductionto the physical surroundings, equipment and art of the Roman spectacles(complete with over 150 excellent illustrations). The geographical spread ofRoman sports facilities is brought home by H. Benario in a brief but valuablearticle listing (with tables of specifics) some fifty of the largest amphitheatresof the Roman world in descending order.78 Even more impressive and ubiqui-tous are the remains of Roman baths, public edifices which operated as socialcenters as well as multi-faceted sports complexes.79 More and more, artisticevidence, from lamps to sculpture, is productively being used as a source forRoman sport.80 A traditional but still very promising medium here is the mo-saic, and Katherine Dunbabin has produced an important article.81 One cannote that the ‘Bikini’ mosaic from Piazza Armerina, although frequently usedas an illustration, still awaits scholarly consensus. Finally, we can expect thatbefore long someone will provide a detailed overall treatment of the art andarchitecture of Roman sport.

Of perennial interest as a pivotal yet enigmatic figure in Roman history,Augustus played a key role in the history of Roman sport. Throughout hislengthy career he demonstrated a great appeciation of the popularity, and thevalue for public relations, of sport, athletics and public entertainment. Con-temporary with Augustus, and not unrelated to his career, is the most famousdescription of sport in latin literature—the funeral games in Book V of Vir-gil’s Aeneid. Two recent discussions shed light on both Virgil and Augustusin relation to sport. In “The Function of Vergil’s Funeral Games,” CW 66(1972), pp. 85-96, J. Glazewski places the games for Anchises within theoverall structure of the epic. This literary study concludes that Book V is not“some meaningless respite or conventional form in the narrative” (p. 90), butrather it is organically related to the central plot. According to Glazewski,Virgil looks forward and backward here, using the games to recollect pasthappenings and presage future ones. For example, the inclusion of the boatrace recalls the wanderings and maritime perils of I-IV while the Lusus Troiae

77. For an interesting review of the longstanding puzzle of the velum, the Colosseum awning, see NormaGoldman. “Reconstructing the Roman Colosseum Awning,” Archaeology 35 Nr. 2 (March/April 1982), pp.57-65.

78. H. Benario, “Amphitheatres of the Roman World,” CJ 76 (1981), pp. 255-258; also see G.V. Gentili,“Studi e ricerche sull’anfitheatro di Siracusa,” Palladio 23 (1973), pp. 3-80.

79. For an archaeological study, see K. de Fine-Licht, Untersuchungen on den Traiansthermen zu Rom(Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1974). On baths at Pompeii, see S. Grunauer, “Thermen und öffendlicher Badebe-trieb,” AU 20 Nr. 3 (1977), pp. 49-58.

80. H. Gabelmann, “Circusspiele in der spätantiken Repräsentationskunst,” AW 11 Nr. 4 (1980), pp. 25-38, studies depictions of the emperor as priest and later president of the circus games.

81. Katherine M. D. Dunbabin, “The Victorious Chariotter on Mosaics and Related Monuments,” AJA86 (1982), pp. 65-89: also see S. E. Waywell, “Roman Mosaics in Greece,” AJA 83 (1979), pp. 193-231.

27


looks forward to military matters and the war in Latium in VI-XII. Crucial tothe development of Aeneas, V sees echoes of his previous actions as a dutifulson, and it presages, in his role as organizer and arbiter of the games, hisfuture role as leader. Similarly, old Entellus, boxing out of pietas against hisown wishes, personifies the reclaimed character of Aeneas, and the role ofAscanius in the Trojan game is an analogy to the future energetic leadership ofAeneas.82 Glazewski further points out that the overall mood of V is consis-tent with the epic: “The games are permeated with a spirit of joy, but joy thatis bound up with a sense of weariness, struggle and toil.” (p. 89).83 Gla-zewski’s broader conclusion is that within the epic genre Virgil composedquite freely and not out of subservice to Homer.

Looking at Aeneid V from a more historical perspective, W.W. Briggs,“Augustan Athletics and the Games of Aeneid V,” Stadion 1 (1975), pp.267-283, points out that the similarities and differences between Aeneid V andIliad XXIII have long been noted, and he agrees that Virigl’s purpose was notsimply to redo Homer. However, Briggs suggests, “To date, the full extent ofthe Augustan characteristics of Virgil’s funeral games has not been ex-plored.” (p. 268). He argues that Virgil, intending to make his Trojans rele-vant to contemporary Rome, makes the Trojans act like aristocratic Augustansand depicts Aeneas as the embodiment of Augustan wisdom, bravery andleadership. Where Glazewski explained the character development of Aeneasin V as central to the plot of the epic, Briggs concentrates on demonstratingAeneas’ Augustan aspects in V. “In short, he (Aeneas) appears as statesmanand magistrate, two roles which bring to mind the foremost political figure ofVirgil’s time, Augustus.” (p. 274). Briggs notes that the games themselves,in consecrating the memory of a father, demonstrate Augustan piety, and thatproper Augustan virtues in various characters bring them rewards fromAeneas. As well as explaining fairly obvious Augustan references, such as theboat race at the Actian games and Augustus’ interest in the Trojan game,Briggs uses numerous examples and detailed historical references to arguethat Aeneid V contains many other deliberate parallels with historical accountsof Augustus’ attitudes and activities in the area of sport.84 However, Briggssees Virgil not as a mere propagandist but rather as an artist of his age creat-ing, within a genre, a work reflective of his era (and its sport history). To-gether Briggs and Glazewski suggest to us that Virgil—like Homer—is valu-

82. Glazewski feels that the boxing match of Darer and Entellus previews the final encounter of the boast-ful Turnus and the war-weary Aeneas in XII. Admittedly, the boxing match was the event “that came closest tohuman sacrifice as a means of procuring victory” (p. 94), but it it also possible that Virgil is looking back to thearmed combat in Iliad XXIII with the intervention of Achilles paralleling that of Aeneas in the boxing match.

83. Glazewski also sees sacrifice through suffering in order to achieve the goal as another underlying themein the games and the epic, but some may disagree with the importance she attaches (p. 95) to the death of thedove in V as a symbol of a necessary death prior to the new foundation of a city by Acestes.

84. Briggs is perhaps overemphatic in his argument, for many ‘Augustan’ elements, such as the praise ofloyalty and patience above arrogance, could also be seen as Homeric reflections. For example, Briggs suggests(p. 277) that, with its possibility of death, the boxing match in V is an analogy to gladiatorial contests andAugustus’ actions concerning them. More simply, Briggs and Glazewski might consider the possibility thatVirgil ’s boxing match conflates Homer’s boxing match and the fight in armour. It is certainly possible, here andelswhere, that the brilliant Virgil was both creating and imitating on more than one level.

28


able as a historical source as well as a work of art: both Aeneid V and IliadXXIII combine heroic and traditional with more contemporary and creativeelements.

Augustus’ true, personal feelings about sport, like those of Alexander, re-main elusive but his public policies concerning sport were definite and exten-sive. He took a conspicuous interest in Greek athletic festivals and fosteredversions of them in the Sebasta and the Actian Games, perhaps to broaden theinterests of the Romans or to assure the eastern part of the empire of his goodwill. 85 His revival of the iuventus, that combination of physical, civic andmilitary training, is variously interpreted. It may have been part of his attemptto rejuvenate the upper classes; it is consistent with his concern for the armyand the youth of Italy; and it does recall to mind the epphebeia. The most curi-ous practice associated with the iuventus is the Lusus Troiae, a military ridewith Etruscan precedents, which was much favoured by Augustus.86 It wouldnot be inaccurate to suggest that in the area of sport the Augustan ‘restoration’was a combination of new and traditional elements.

Quite intentionally. Augustus furthered the late Republican tendency to nu-merous and more elaborate spectacles. At Rome the late Republican dynastsand Augustus did much to develop public facilities such as theatres and baths.Augustus’ sporting munificence, including the Secular Games of 17 B.C..figures prominently in his Res Gestae. In many ways, Augustus set an endur-ing example for later emperors by outlining the relationship of the Princeps tohis people. Part of this relationship was the infamous policy of “bread andcircuses” —the imperial patronage of a system of urban relief and mass diver-sion. The institution of bread and circuses has been denounced through theages for its excesses and its involvement in the Christian prosecutions. Theantics of Nero, Commodus and others are notorious, but the nature of oursources must be kept in mind.87 Certainly the spectacles remained the majorform of public entertainment, and historically the arrangements of bread andcircuses were largely understandable and acceptable.88 The relationship be-tween the emperor and his people at the games entailed communication andco-operation as well as sublimation and manipulation, and by comparison

85. See H. Langenfeld, “Die Politik des Augustus und die griechische Agonistik,” in E. Lefèvre, ed.,Monumentum Chiloniense Studien zur augusteischen Zeit. Kieler Festschrift für Erich Burck (AmsterdamHakkert, 1975), pp. 228-259; R. Merkelbach,“Zu der Festordnung für die Sebasta in Neapel.” ZPE 15(1974), pp. 192-193.

86. G. Pfister has studied the sporting and military aspects of the iuvenius. See his “Die romischeiuventus,” in Uberhorst, Geschichte, vol. 2, pp. 250-279, based on his “Die Emeuemung der romischeniuventus durch Augustus” (Diss., Regensburg, 1977). Also cf. D. Ladage, “Collegia iuventum—Ausbildungeiner municipalen Elite?” Chiron 9 (1979), pp. 319-346. On the Trojan Game, see K. W. Weeler, “TroiaeLusus. Alter und Entstehung eines Reiterspiels, AncSoc 5 (1974), pp. 171-196.

87. For example, R. F. Newbold. “Cassius Dio and the Games,” AC 44 (1975), pp. 589-604, clarifiesDio's attitude to sport:

Curiosity and antiquarianism play their part, but in writing of the games, he sees them more as a politicalinstitution rather than a social phenomenon... An emperor‘s games policy provided a convenientyardstick for measuring his performance as a whole.

Also see J. Deininger, “Brot und Spiele. Tacitus und die Entpolitisierung der plebs urbana.” Gymnasium 86(1979), pp. 278-303.

88. Cf. P. Veyne, Le pain et le cirque. Sociologie historique d’un pluralisme politique (Paris: Ed. de Seuil,1976).

29

Journal of Sport History, Vol, 10, No. 1 (Spring, 1983)

with Byzantine times (see below) the Roman system perhaps had some posi-tive aspects..

For the history of ancient sport the rise of Christianity had far-reaching im-plications, but the attitudes of the early Christians and their leaders to sportare hard to determine. Like the Jews, the Christians found themselves in con-tact with people devoted to either or both Greek and Roman sport. The reac-tions of the Christians interest both the historian and the theologian. CertainlyChristian writers were remarkably knowledgeable about sport, and as thechurch grew Christian literature went from metaphors from Greek sport toemphatic denunciations of Roman sport.89 Scholarship now suggests that the-ologically the church leaders were not hostile to care of the body or the pursuitof health, and that they were reasonably tolerant about Greek sport, but thatthey had to condemn the excessive or improper use of God’s gifts in Romanspectacles.

90 Historically, the triumph of Christianity did not immediately or

absolutely eradicate ancient sport, but over time the Greek athletic festivaland the Roman gladiatorial and beast fights came to an end. Perhaps the realirony is that one ancient sport, chariot racing, was so enthusiastically adoptedby the Christian (Byzantine) Empire in the east that it endured for centuries.

Although Harris and Auguet paid some attention to the Byzantine circus,sport in the Late Roman Empire and the Byzantine world was an area of littlestudy in 1972. Since then Byzantine sport has experienced a major historicalrenaissance through the scholarly efforts of Alan Cameron. The Byzantine eraincluded continuity—the significance of the circus and spectatorship—anddiscontinuity—the end of gladiatorial and Olympic games. Like the study oflocal games and the Hellenistic era, the study of sport beyond the city ofRome and in the late imperial and Byzantine eras has been very productive.91

The works of Cameron have brought new vitality and exacting scholarshipto the study of the social and political significance of Roman and Byzantinechariot racing, spectatorship and violence, and the organization of public en-tertainments at Rome and Constantinople.92 Cameron’s interest began with anongoing project on chariot race epigrams in the Greek Anthology and in-

89. On the attitude of the Fathers of the Church to public games, see J. Ebert, “Die lateinischen Kirck-enväter und die antiken Wettkämpfe,” Stadion 1 (1975), pp. 185-197: and W. Weisman, Kirche und Schaus-piele. Die Schauspiele im Urteil der lateinischen Kirchenväter unter besonderer Beruecksichrigung von Augus-tin (Würzburg: Augustinus Verlag, 1972).

90. On Christian attitudes to physical education, see A Koch,“Leibesübungen in Frühchristenturn und inder beginnenden Völkerwanderungzeit,” Uberhorst, Geschichte, vol. 2, pp. 312-340: or Ralph B. Ballou, “AnAnalysis of the Writings of Selected Church Fathers to A D. 394 to Reveal Attitudes Regarding Physical Ac-tivity ,” in Zeigler, History, pp. 187-200. For a theological argument that the early, if not the later, Christianshad a very positive attitude to the body, see Frank Bottomley, Attitudes to the Body in Western Christendom(London: Lepus Books, 1979).

91. Barbara Schrodt, “Sports of the Byzantine Empire,” JSH 8 Nr. 3 (1981), pp. 40-59, offers a generalintroduction to the area, highlighting the works of Cameron. She argues that this period of sport history was“uniquely Byzantine” (p. 40) and not Just an era of transplanted Greek or Roman sport. She also discussesByzantine polo (izykanion), described by A. Bryer, “Byzantine Games,”HT 17 (1967), pp. 453-459, as “akind of mounted lacrosse” (p. 457).

92. Alan Cameron, Porphyrius the Charioteer (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1973); “Heresies and Factions,”Byzantion 44 (1974), pp. 92-120; “Demes and Factions,” BZ 67 (1974), pp. 74-91; Bread and Circuses: TheRoman Emperor and his People (London: Inaugural Lecture at King’s College, 1974); Circus Factions; Bluesand Greens at Rome and Byzantium (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976).

30


creased when L. Robert invited him to publish a statue base found in Istanbulin 1963. From this Cameron went on to write Porphyrius, a publication ofdocuments, a commentary and a reconstruction of the life of that famous charioteer of the first half of the sixth century. Porphyrius begins with a discussionof the reliefs and iconography of the extant statue bases to Porphyrius andshows the correlation of such works with late Roman art. 'Cameron thendiscusses the inscriptions and argues that the versions in the Anthology werecopied from the original bases, and that other chariot epigrams in the collection were similarly preserved. Next Cameron discusses the manuscript traditions of the epigrams and gives a philological commentary; he writes with witand clarity but the untranslated Greek and technical arguments may makeparts of the book daunting for many. After discussing the lost monuments ofPorphyrius and four other charioteers, Cameron presents a convincing reconstruction of the life of Porphyrius, the first charioteer to win a statue on thespina of the Byzantine hippodrome while still competing. Cameron arguesthat the sixth century was the height of Byzantine' charioteering, in part because of the demise of the beast shows and pantomimes. 93 This valuable bookalso discusses other forms of public entertainment, factions and violence, andthe overall significance of the circus in Byzantine life. 94

In the course of his work on Porphyrius, Cameron became enthusiasticabout the history of circus factions, "an astonishingly underresearched subject" (p. V), long misunderstood, because· of misconceptions in previousscholarship. While the effect of his Circus Factions is revisionist, his methodology is traditional: he went back to the primary evidence without preconceptions and applied the best techniques of philology, history and art history. 95

The end result was what is now the major work on the evolution and significance of circus factions and, moreover, a thorough history of public entertainment in the Roman and Byzantine world.

The first part of Circus Factions investigates terminology and refutes previous theories. An intensive discussion of sources and terminology clarifies themeaning offactio. Previous scholars had inappropriately applied to large divisions of the population a term that more properly referred to 'fan clubs' orsmaller groups of 'circus partisans. '96 Forming only a minority of the specta-

93. Cameron, Porphyrius (p. 3) suggests that,. . . the career of Porphyrius marked a new peak in the fame and material rewards of charioteers-afame that is less an index of the skill of the charioteers than of the growing importance of the hippodrome in Byzantine life-and of the increasing rivalry of the circus factions.

94. On evidence about chariot racing in other parts of the ancient world, see E.G. Turner, "The Charioteers from Antinoe," JHS 93 (/973), pp. 192-195; M. Vickers, "The Hippodrome at Thessaloniki," JRS 62(/972), pp. 25-32; and John Humphrey, "Prolegomena to the Study of the Hippodrome at Caesarea Maritima," Bulletin of the American Schools ofOriental Research 213 (February 1974), pp. 2-45.

95. Cameron, Circus Factions, Preface, p.v:It was time to make a completely fresh start, to collect all the evidence and set it in a proper perspective.If the factions that emerge lack the glamour of the freedom fighters of tradition, they are no less remarkable in their different way. . . -and are at least firmly rooted in the evidence. If the traditional view isever to be reformulated, it is likewise evidence, not dogma, that will have to be cited.

96. Auguet, Cruelty, p. 140, conjoins various traditional views of the factions:They became real parties, favorable or hostile to established authority and liable, when circumstancesdemanded, to organize their own militias; when menaced by an enemy, the 'Greens' protected the

31


tors, the true factions were state-controlled and state-financed groups of per-formers and partisans administered within a single guild of public entertain-ers. Numbering only a thousand or two, these partisans were largelyresponsible for the outbreaks of violence for which previous scholars had of-fered dogmatic interpretations. Cameron shows that the so-called demes of theBlues and the Greens were not demes in the Greek or geographical sense; theywere simply organizations of the most committed fans (some 900 Blues and1500 Greens), each led by a demarch.97 Cameron disproves the social inter-pretation, that lower class Greens opposed upper class Blues, by showing thatthe factional violence was not due to conflict of the poor against the rich. Nexthe rejects the military interpretation and proves that the factions did not func-tion as a city militia. Finally, he disproves the religious interpretation of theGreens as monophysites and the Blues as trinitarians, concluding that religionwas not a factor in the activity of the groups. Having discarded these canoni-cal interpretations, Cameron approaches the factions from the perspective ofsport as ancient sports fans.

The second part of Circus Factions presents Cameron’s own findings andinterpretations. Cameron would revise the usual image of the factions ofRome and Constantinople; he traces the roots of the Byzantine colours intoRoman history and sees a significant degree of continuity. He rejects the tradi-tional contrast of “. . .the feckless, degenerate, work-shy plebs of earlyimperial Rome concerned only with its bread and circuses, and the alert, fear-less, freedom-loving people of Constantinople, represented by the circus fac-tions.” (p. 157). If anything the Roman factions were more political: Cam-eron argues that in the Roman circus and theatre there was a higher degree ofpopular expression, and that the emperor attended to the voice of his people.By contrast, the Byzantine emperor often treated protests in the theatre andcircus with contempt. In Byzantium the imperial presidency of the circus washeld as a conspicuous symbol of the master’s power and glory. Although thefactions gained a significant role in ceremonies and coronations, the Byzan-tine dominus was more removed from the people than the Roman princepshad been.

Turning to the issue of violence in Rome and Byzantium, Cameron againsees continuity but also significant differences. Although not associated withthe Blues and Greens, factional disturbances (protests and riots) did occur inthe circuses and especially the theatres of the early empire, but Cameron feelsthat such events were perhaps more political in the first, second and third cen-turies than in the fifth and sixth. According to Cameron, popular protestscould lead to violence at Rome, and at Byzantium riots were perhaps duesimply to strong sporting rivalry.“Most factional disturbances of the later

seaports and the ‘Blues’ defended a part of the city. They popular bodies, like demes, and despitethe similarity of name where in no way comparable to the factors of ancient Rome.97. Cameron, Circus Factions, p. 44:They are not residential areas or municipal units; they are not either the population as a whole or thecommon people; they are not even anything new; Nothing more then the members of the Blue and Greenfan clubs.

32


Empire were riots pure and simple. Where they did have more serious objects,they were seldom successful. " (p. 193).

What was new in Byzantium, starting in the fifth century, was the association of the Blues and Greens with such violence; and Cameron's explanationof this development is the least satisfactory (or least clear) part of his work.Cameron suggests that the increase of violence was due to the amalgamationof circus and theatre factions. The claque system of the theatre apparently wasintroduced into the circus factions and became part of the ceremonial performances held in honor of the emperor. 98 These theatre claques largely formedthe demes of the Blues and Greens: they brought with them a propensity forhooliganism and so associated the Blues and Greens with violence, but violence of an undirected, non-political nature. Over time these factions drewcloser to the emperor and effectively became part of his court so that by theseventh century the factions rioted less and appeared to 'decline': "Their 'decline' is really an ascent to respectability. " (p. 310).

What Cameron has done-albeit by traditional methods and disciplinesis recognize ancient 'fans' and their violence as part of the realm of sportrather than politics or religion. 99 With the highest scholarly accomplishment,Cameron treats spectator sport and public entertainment as a major concernand activity in itself, capable of moving people and affecting history, andworthy of study in its own right. 100 Moreover, Cameron's efforts on Romansport are very compatible with those of Pleket on Greek sport. Both scholarsgo back to the sources (famous and obscure) with fresh perspectives; both gobeyond the technical activities of sport to look at the wider social significanceof sport. Like Pleket, Cameron tries to appreciate the character of the sportand entertainment of a given era without enforcing juxtapositions or overlystrict periodization. In finding significant change but also significant continuity in sport in different periods, both scholars encourage us to rethink ourconcepts of 'development' and 'decline.' 101

In retrospect, if there has been a general bias in the study of ancient sportfrom 1972 to 1982 it is an understandable and modem one: most studies havehad a favorable attitude to sport as a basic and positive element in different

98. The claques were hired applauders. They formed part of the composite factions created by the authorities who sponsored the public entertainments; their main function was to serve the emperor by participating androusing applause during imperial ceremonies.

99. Cameron's willingness to present incidents as understandable without resorting to dogmatic interpretationsis apparent in his Appendix C, "A Circus Dialogue," which gives a translation and notes on a famousdialogue in Theophanes between the Greens and Justinian's herald. The Greens complain that they have beentreated unfairly, and the herald rebukes them and openly sides with the Blues. Cameron sees this dialogue as nomore and no less than a depiction of mutual abuse at the circus.

100. For a historical investigation of violence andspectatorship over a broad period, see A. Guttmann,"Sports Spectators from Antiquity to the Renaissance," iSH 8 Nr. 2 (1981), pp. 5-27. The appeal and effect ofmass spectator sport is of great interest to modern sport sociologists; for an analysis of the ritualistic aspects ofsuch sport in modern times, see A. T. Cheska, "Sport Spectacular: A Ritual Model for Power," InternationalReview ofSport Sociology 2 Nr. 14 (1979), pp. 51-72.

101. Pleket," Athletes and Ideology," p. 53, sees as a major issue in the study of sport,. . . the problem of how much development there actually was in antiquity and what sort of development; that is to say: do we get qualitatively new situations, which gradually evolved out of-and in theprocess superseded-old situations or would it be wiser to think in terms of further elaboration of whatwas already available in substance in earlier times?

33


cultures and periods. In the future, trends to demythologizing, cross-culturaland interdiscliplinary study will probably continue. Greece and Rome willremain the major focuses but studies should continue to broaden out to look atless spectacular and less ‘Olympian’ topics. Future studies will go beyondOlympic activities, sites and attitudes to look at sport as part of Hellenistic,Jewish, Christian and Byzantine history. Works will be less adult male domi-nated, and they will look at masses as well as minorities.

As the study of ancient sport becomes more popular and professional itsfuture becomes more promising. Continued study of ancient literature fromthe perspective of sport will clarify the contemporary and traditional reflec-tions in various works. In both Greece and Rome, art and women in relationto sport merit increased study. Archaeology and the social sciences will con-tinue to provide new sources and approaches; the completion of Nemea andour growing understanding of modern sport spectatorship promise many in-sights. Finally, after a year which saw the vindication of Jim Thorpe as wellas tragedies like those of Gilles Villeneuve and Duk Koo Kim, it seems fittingthat we should continue to ponder questions like the definition of ‘profes-sional’ and ‘sport,’ the lure for spectators of violence and the possibility ofdeath, and the whole issue of progress and decline in sport.

34

Documents

Directions in Ancient Sport History